Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re[2]: b(l xmh in Nahum 1:2

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: ben.crick AT argonet.co.uk (Ben Crick)
  • To: b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu
  • Subject: Re[2]: b(l xmh in Nahum 1:2
  • Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2000 22:18:26 +0000


On Tue 4 Jan 2000 (12:32:07), peter_kirk AT sil.org wrote:
> I feel that here you are trying to shelter behind the polysemy in
> English of the word "lord", indeed trying to stretch it to cover the
> even greater polysemy of the Hebrew BA(AL. Maybe Butterworth and Pusey
> were trying to translate the word BA(AL consistently as "lord"
> wherever it occurs - which even the Revised Version did not attempt
> with this word.

Dear Peter,

Thanks for your input. I was hoping for more than I can find locally.
I agree about the "even greater polysemy of the Hebrew BA(AL". But no;
my aim was to unpack the highly compressed language of Nahum 1:2, not
to force a uniform English equivalent for B(L.

> What do you mean by your phrase "a lord of wrath"? Is "lord" here a
> divine title? Presumably not, as you do not use a capital letter. Does
> it mean "nobleman", or "one in authority", or "owner" as of slaves?
> Does it simply mean "one in control"? And if so, do you mean that YHWH
> controls all wrath in the world, or only his own wrath?

IMHO a construct pair sometimes covers for a shortage of adjectives.
So here, it might be the equivalent of "a wrathful lord"; or, a lord who
is exceedingly angry. Luther has "ja, ein Raecher ist der HERR *und
zornig*". YWHW is the subject of this string of attributes; HE is the One
who is the wrathful lord. Jerome in the Vulgate has "habens furorem". The
LXX has EKDIKWN KURIOS META QUMOU (Brenton).

B(L is not a Divine title for YHWH (or is there an example of it as such?);
it can mean a human husband, master, lord, landlord; or an occult entity,
or an idol (a non-entity). So here I guess it means "masterful in his anger"?
Not hitting out in blind rage (verse 3).

> I think we need to realise that in general the construct relation is
> not always best translated into English by "X of Y". Of course such an
> English phrase has many different meanings, not simply possessive. I
> think that this is a case where we need to look at how the word BA(AL
> is used in construct relationships, when the second member is an
> abstract noun. In very many cases, including the two from Proverbs I
> quoted, the meaning is "one characterised by", with absolutely no
> divine overtones. The divine name Baal is used as a construct in such
> phrases as Baal-Peor and Baal-Zebub, but the only case which is
> anywhere near a parallel with Nahum 1:2 is Baal-Berith, Judges 8:33,
> 9:4, which is a divine name. This would leave open the possibility
> that Baal-Xema is a divine name and Nahum is identifying YHWH with
> that divinity, but I don't think that one fits the context nearly as
> well as my parallel in Proverbs.

No, I wasn't thinking of Ba`al-Xemah as a divine entity identified here
with YHWH; but that YHWH here characterises Himself with masterful wrath
as an attribute, along with his judgment and justice. Still less was I
thinking of Ba`al-Xemah as some sort of baleful occult entity locked in
cosmic conflict with YHWH (which I took to be the thrust of the original
enquiry). That sort of thing is found in Daniel 10:13, if anywhere.

I'm on a learning curve myself here!

Shalom
Ben
--
Revd Ben Crick, BA CF
<ben.crick AT argonet.co.uk>
232 Canterbury Road, Birchington, Kent, CT7 9TD (UK)
http://www.cnetwork.co.uk/crick.htm







Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page